<
<
Those sleazeballs over at talk.origins still keep insisting
that my specimens -- petrified bones, teeth and soft organs
(some human) discovered between coal veins -- were
identified as concretions by all of the experts who had
examined them.
<
Yes, this is true -- only because the so-called "experts"
of anthropology and paleontology did not operate honestly
in either their examination or their testing. Their examination
and their testing was a farce.
<
I will identify some of these "experts" -- the scumbags --
and tell a dozen horror stories right after a brief word from
our sponsor.
<
=========================================
=========================================
<
> THE EVOLUTION BUCK STOPS HERE
> (Petrified Human Remains Found Between Coal Veins)
> Lin Liangtai (lin440...@
yahoo.com.tw) of Taipei, Taiwan,
> posted the following to talk.origins on Sat., Sept. 23, 2006.
> Ed Conrad had placed the specimen in his possession for testing.
<
Mr. Ed Conrad's fossil wood has been proven to be man-made.
<
The wood has been identified by a coal petrographer and a
paleobotanist in Kentucky to be cordaite stem.
<
The thin sections of the fossil wood's cross section shows
no pith or pith cast. They also show the fossil has no radial
structure of wood (rays and tracheids) in its cross section.
<
Instead, they show parallel structure of wood (rays and tracheids)
in its cross section.
<
Anyone who knows a bit about wood knows that the cross section
of natural tree stems shows wood in its radial structure of rays
and tracheids, while a wooden handle's end show parallel structure
of the wood (rays, tracheids,vessels).
<
The related photos can be seen at:
<
http://tw.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/lin440315/album?.dir=bd1dscd&.src=ph...
http://tw.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/lin440315/my_photos
<
IMAG5969 was taken from the thin section's center while IMAG
5970 was taken from the thin section's top side.
<
Lin Liangtai
<
===========================================
===========================================
<
Now back to our pathetic story of deceit, deception, collusion
and conspiracy as clearly evident by members of the
Pseudoscientific Establishment.
<
1. The horror story began in June 1981 when I discovered
a large object that resembled a skull between coal veins
in NE Pennsylvania. I sent Penn State University a photo
and its "expert" agreed it resembled a skull but stated that,.
since it was found in Carboniferous strata. it HAD TO BE
a concretion.
<
He pointed out that the formation of anthracite dates back
a minimum of 280 million years and all scientific textbooks
claim no large animals existed back then.
<
2. I then sent a color photo of the same specimen to Alan
Mann, anthropologist at the University of Pennsylvanian.
He was intrigued and asked me to bring it to Philadelphia
so he could thoroughly examine it.
<
Mann was about an hour late for our appointment and,
upon entering the room, slapped his hands together and
exclaimed: ":Well, where is it?."
<
When told it was in the corner of the large room, he saw it
from a distance, hurried over, got down on one knee and
exclaimed: "My God, I don't believe it!."
<
For about five minutes of so, Mann examined the specimen,
then announced that it was a concretion -- not the skull
of an animal that ever lived.
<
3. I later sent the same color photo to the Smithsonian and
received a reply from Raymond Rye III, museum specialist in its
Department of Paleobiology, expressing an interest in having its
experts examine it. He wrote back, saying they agreed to do so.
I drove to Washington, D.C., with the specimen -- and a witness
(Clayton Lennon) -- and Rye had a physical anthropologist,
a paleontologist and a geologist assembled for my arrival.
<
All three spent a few minutes examining the specimen and
unanimously agreed it was a concretion, certainly not a petrified
skull.
<
Neither the original expert at Penn State nor Mann at U of P
nor these three knuckleheads at the Smithsonian informed me
that there is a positive test to determine if a rock-like object
is petrified bone. That is, by examining its cell structure
microscopically. (I had to learn this on my own some months
later).
<
4. After pressing Penn State to investigate the matter -- using
the influence of state Sen. James Rhoades -- I was invited
to the campus and met with Roger Cuffey, paleontologist.
<
When I arrived, his laboratory was set up with many microscopes
and he explained that under each one was a ground section
showing the cell structure (Haversian canals) of what he said
was dinosaur bone.
<
Then, nervous as a cat, Cuffey handed me a letter stating that
my visit to his laboratory confirmed that none of my specimens
were petrified bone and that I should throw in the towel. This letter
was handed to me BEFORE I even had an opportunity to peer
thru his microscopes.
<
It was a ploy: Dinosaurs possessed reptilian Haversian canals,
quite different (larger) than the cell structure of mammalian bone.
<
5. Later, I phoned Richard Eckhardt, an anthropologist at
Penn State, and he invited me to come up and let him have
a look at some of my specimens. But he said it would have
to be after he returned from Europe, since the semester was
near its end and he was going to England for the summer.
In September, after classes began, I phoned him again but
now he adamantly expressed NO interest in seeing my specimens.
But I got a bit pushy and reminded him what he promised
and he rather reluctantly allowed me to pay a visit.
I did and, as we sat in his office while he examined some
of my specimens, he called them all concretions -- but asked
if he could take photos of them which I allowed him to do. And
when I was leaving, he mentioned that I had said I have more
larger specimens in the trunk of my car and he expressed
a desire to see -- and photograph -- them as well, which he did.
6. I had contacted the Paleontological Research Institution
in New York State and dealt with a John Chiment. He expressed
a desire to examine one of my specimens and I mailed it to him.
<
Upon its return after several weeks, Chiment informed me in
multi-page handwritten letter that it was not bone but, instead, a
concretion. He also strongly urged me to give up.
<
7. I wrote to Noel Boaz, an anthropologist/paleontologist at New
York University, and sent him photos of some of my specimens.
He appeared very much interested in seeing them and we set
up a day for his visit to my home in Shenandoah, Pa. But the day
before he was to arrive, I phoned him to make sure he was coming
but he surprised me and said he could not make it because he
was busy.
<
8. Now having been self-educated in the identification of Haversian
canals of mammals, I wrote to Luis Alvarez at the University
of California-Berkeley, then received a letter stating that I should
send a few specimens and the university would use its expertise
to determine if they are petrified bone.
<
Well, three specimens were sent by certified mail, but when the green
card came back it was unsigned. I had the local postmaster send the
card back for a signature confirming their arrival but this time it
was returned with someone's initials -- not LA for Louis Alvarez.
<
I then had the Post Office sent the green card back again and this
time it had writing aside of it, pointing to the pintails and stating
that the initials belonged to the chairman of the paleontology
department.
<
After failing to hear a word for more than a month, I wrote a polite
letter requesting the specimens be returned. I, in turn,
received a letter saying they NEVER ARRIVED.
<
At that point, I had a Postal inspector visit the Berkeley (Ca,)
main Post Office and he uncovered physical evidence that the
specimens had been delivered -- and signed for -- by someone
at the university.
<
With this ammunition, I re-contacted UofC-Berkeley and demanded
the specimens be returned or else... And about a week later they were
returned. But all three appeared uncut (meaning a slice had not been
removed to examine the cell structure).
<
I took the specimens to a lapidary who told me it was simple to
tell if any of them had been cut by placing them under running
water (his kitchen sink). I did and, lo and behold, the side of one
had been sliced (undoubtedly for microscopic investigation for
the presence of Haversian canals which had to be present, otherwise
there would have been no coverup).
<
9. Andrew McRae, then a grad student at Calgary University in
Canada, agreed to examine one of my specimens. I sent him
the one which Wilton M. Krogman identified as a portion of a tibia.
<
Weeks and weeks went by without a response from McRae, but
then he announced that it was a concretion and posted his
results on his Cecil B. DeMille-like Web page. Then he sent
the ground section that he allegedly had used for his testing and
the remainder of the specimen back to me.
<
A few days after McRae's pronouncement, I had an e-mail from
Paul (PZ) Myers of Temple University, informing me that I could
bring the specimen to his laboratory in Philadelphia to prove, once
and for all, that the tibia-like specimen was not petrified bone but a
concretion.
<
I took the bait and visited him with the ground section. And, yes,
no Haversian canals could be seen.
<
But later, when I examined the complete specimen after my return
home, I realized the Haversian canals were clearly visible. That's
when I knew McRae and Myers had pulled a fast one, tampering with
evidence..
<
And I have accused both McRae and Myers of conspiring against truth
by manufacturing a ground section from a concretion and trying to pass
it off as having been sliced from my specimen.
<
When I pushed Myers on talk.origins and requested Temple University
check its telephone records to see if anyone had made phone calls to
Calgary University during the period that McRae had the specimen,
Myers ADMITTED he had made some calls.
<
Then, when pressed even more, Myers actually admitted in a posting
to talk.origins that HE HAD FLOWN TO CALGARY one weekend while
McRae was doing his fraudulent testing. But he explained that it was
not to confer with McRae but was done for other reasons (undoubtedly
instructing him how to try and con me).
<
10. A Kurt Wise at Harvard University wrote and requested I send him
a specimen for honest investigation, which I did. I sent him a beaut
that Krogman had identified as part of a spine.
<
Wise took a few weeks, then wrote back and stated that testing
revealed it to be a concretion. However, after a period of time
passed, he did not return the specimen.
<
Finally, I wrote and informed him the specimen was my property
and I'd like it back. This letter was ignored, so I wrote him again
and bluntly informed him it better be returned or else...A few days
later a package arrived from Wise but a large corner of it was ripped
and, when I opened it, there was no specimen inside.
<
Wise made it seem as though the package had gotten ripped
during handling and the specimen fell out. But the specimen
I sent him could not possibly have fallen out because it was
too large for the hole..
<
Another Smoking Gun was the postage. There were TWO
meter postage stickers on it, which just does not happen in
legitimate mailing. Besides, the total price to send the package
didn't add up to what the specimen cost to send, no matter
which way it was mailed and no matter the weight of the
package..
<
11. I had learned Allan Walker at Johns Hopkins University
was an expert on prehistoric teeth so called him and asked
if he would examine what Krogman had identified as a premolar
tooth that was found in the jaw-like area of the first specimen I
discovered.
<
I drove to Baltimore (again with Lennon) but Walker didn't invite
me into the building. Instead he came out and, while I was
double-parked on the street outside Johns Hopkins Hospital, he
informed me that the tooth-like object was a concretion.
<
But I didn't stand for his bullshit and let him have it verbally.
And then -- surprisingly -- he nervously remarked: "But you should
have more teeth than just one."
<
12. Back we go to the Smithsonian. One year after paying my
visit with the first specimen during which I was conned, I discovered
the human skull embedded in the boulder.
<
I sent Rye a photo and he replied that it does resemble
a human skull but "a microscopic study" of its cell structure
would have to be performed "to determine if it has the structure
of bone" (Haversian canals).
<
Weeks later, I received a letter from Rye in which he wrote:
<
"An X-ray analysis of the material reveals it to be quartz, the
most abundant material of the earth's crust. So although the
enigmatic object exposed in the boulder may resemble a
hominid skull, its mineral composition is definitely not that
of bone."
<
Great curve ball, Raymond! The only problem, X-ray analysis
is not the test that should've been done. You see, X-ray
analysis is NOT "a microscopic study" to determine if
Haversian systems exist in the specimen. The Smithsonian
dodged the bullet with deceit, deception, collusion and
conspiracy.
<
I might add there are more and more horror stories to
go along with my fight against the Scientific Establishment
which wants nothing more but to protect the factless, facetious
Theory of man's Evolution.
<
But I'll save some of them for another day.
<
=====================================
<
> WORLD'S LARGEST NEWSPAPERS
Rank Country Circulation
1. Yomiuri Shimbun (Japan) 14,532,694
2. Asahi Shimbun (Japan) 12,601,375
3. Sichuan Ribao (China) 8,000,000
4. Mainichi Shimbun (Japan) 5,845,857
5. Bild (Germany) 5,674,400
6. Chunichi Shimbun (Japan) 4,323,144
7. Sun (England) 3,718,354
8. Renmin Ribao (China) 3,000,000
9. Sankei Shimbun (Japan) 2,890,835
10. Nihon Keizai Shimbun Japan 2,705,877
11. Gongren Ribao (China) 2,500,000
12. Daily Mail (England) 2,387,867
13. Daily Mirror (England) 2,339,001
14. Chosun Ilbo (South Korea) 2,225,000
15. Dong-A Ilbo (South Korea) 2,150,000
16. Hokkaido Shimbun (Japan) 1,962,666
17. Eleftherotypia (Greece) 1,858,316
18. Xin Min Wan Bao (China) 1,750,000
19. Wall Street Journal (U.S.) 1,740,450
20. Yangcheng Wanbao China 1,730,000
21. Kerala Kaumudi (India) 1,720,000
22. Wen Hui Bao Daily (China 1,700,000
23. USA Today (United States) 1,653,428
24. Joong-Ang Ilbo (S. Korea) 1,550,000
25. Economic Daily (China) 1,500,000
26. Rodong Sinmun (N. Korea) 1,500,000
27. Kyung-Hyang Daily News 1,478,537
28. Sports Nippon (Japan) 1,452,699
29. Shizuoka Shimbun (Japan)) 1,442,310
30. Sankei Sports (Japan) 1,367,734
31. Deutche Allgemeine Germ 1,313,400
32. United Daily News (Taiwan ) 1,300,000
33. China Times (Taiwan) 1,270,000
34. O Estado de Sao Paulo Brazil) 1,230,160
35. Jang Daily (Pakistan) 1,200,000
36. Jang Lahore (Pakistan) 1,200,000
37. Akhbar El Yom/Al Akhbar (Egypt) 1,159,339
38. Hankook Ilbo (South Korea) 1,156,000
39. Hochi Shimbun (Japan) 1,119,031
40. Daily Express (England) 1,118,981
41. Los Angeles Times (U.S.) 1,067,540
42. New York Times (U>S) 1,066,540
43. Tokyo Shimbun (Japan 1,062,080
44. Daily Telegraph (England) 1,047,861
45. Nishinippon Shimbun Japan 1,041,104
46. Jiefang Ribao (China) 1,000,000
47. Nanfang Ribao (China) 1,000,000
48. Nongmin Ribao (China) 1,000,000
49. Zhongguo Qingnian Ribao (China) 1,000,000
50. Nikkan Sports (Japan) 984,058
51. Al Akhbar (Egypt) 980,000
52. Guangming Ribao (China) 950,000
53. Al Ahram (Egypt) 900,000
54. Al Goumhouriya (Egypt) 900,000
55. Seoul Shinmun (S. Korea) 900,000
56. Xin Hua Ribao (China) 900,000
57. Verdens Gang (Norway) 870,267
58. Corriere della Sera (Italy) 868,266
59. Kyoto Shimbun (Japan) 839,499
60. Chugoku Shimbun (Japan) 820,000
61 Kobe Shimbun Japan 820,000
62. Times of India (India) 813,000
63. Kobe Shimbun (Japan) 810,353
64. Beijing Wanbao (China) 800,000
65. Hubei Ribao (China) 800,000
66. Jiefangjun Ribao (China) 800,000
67. Trybuna Slaska (Poland) 800,000
68. La Gazzetta dello Sport Italy 798,243
69. Ouest-France (France) 790,133
70. Holos Ukrainy (Ukraine) 768,000
71. The Times (England) 766,999
72. ABC (Spain) 765,668
73. Washington Post (U.SSS>) 759,122
74. La Repubblica (Italy) 754,930
75. De Telegraf (Netherlands) 751,400
76. Gazeta Wyborcza (Poland) 750,000
77. Zero Hora (Brazil) 727,188
78. Diario dos Campos (Brazil) 725,000
79. New York Daily News (U.S.) 723,143
80. Sabah (Turkey) 722,950
81. Jornal da Tarde (Brazil) 709,793
82. Beijing Ribao (China) 700,000
83. Chongqing Ribao (China) 700,000
84. Clarin (Argentina) 700,000
85. Thai Rath (Thailand 700,000
86. Zhejiang Ribao (China) 700,000
87. Diario Insular (Portugal) 684,143
88. Granma Internacional (Cuba) 675,000
89. Chicago Tribune (U.S>) 673,508
90. Daily Record (Scotland) 671,267
91. China Daily News (Taiwan) 670,000
92. The Daily Star (England) 650,406
93. Guangxi Ribao (China) 650,000
94. Malayala Manorama (India) 630,068
95. La Nacion (Argentina) 630,000
96. Hurriyet (Turkey) 615,579
97. Herald Sun (Australia) 600,000
98. Hurriyet (Pakistan) 600,000
99. Liaoning Ribao (China) 600,000
100. Oriental Daily News (Hong Kong) 600,000
<
> 100 LARGEST NEWSPAPERS IN U.S.
Rank Circulation
1. USA Today (Arlington, Va.) 2,154,539
2. Wall Street Journal (NY N.Y.) 2,091,062
3. Times (New York, N.Y.) 1,118,565
4. Times (Los Angeles) 914,584
5. Post (Washington, DC) 732,872
6. Daily News (New York, N.Y.) 729,124
7. Tribune (Chicago) 680,879
8. Post (New York, N.Y.) 652,426
9. Newsday (Long Island, N.Y.) 580,069
10. Chronicle (Houston) 553,018
11. Chronicle (San Francisco) 512,640
12. Morning News (Dallas) 510,133
13. Sun-Times (Chicago) 481,798
14 Globe (Boston) 450,538
15. Arizona Republic (Phoenix) 432,284
16. Star-Ledger (Newark, N.J.) 408,672
17. Star Tribune (Minneapolis) 380,354
18. Inquirer (Philadelphia) 376,493
19. Journal-Constitution (Atlanta) 371,853
20. Plain Dealer (Cleveland) 365,288
21. Free Press (Detroit) 352,714
22. Oregonian (Portland) 342,789
23. Times (St. Petersburg, Fla.) 334,742
24. Union-Tribune (San Diego) 328,531
25. Herald (Miami) 315,850
26. Register Orange County CA 302,864
27. Sun (Baltimore) 301,186
28. Bee (Sacramento, Calif.) 289,905
29. Post (Denver) 288,937
30. Rocky Mtn. News Denver 288,889
31. Post-Dispatch (St. Louis) 285,869
32. Mercury News San Jose CA 271,997
33. Star (Kansas City, Mo.) 267,273
34. Sentinel (Orlando, Fla.) 257,222
35. Times-Picayune N Orleans 253,610
36. Dispatch (Columbus, Ohio) 252,564
37. Star (Indianapolis) 249,891
38. Journal Sentinel Milwaukee 244,288
39. Post-Gazette Pittsburgh Pa 242,546
40. Herald (Boston) 241,457
41. Sun-Sentinel (Ft L'dale, Fla ) 233,634
42. Times (Seattle) 231,505
43. News (Detroit) 227,392
44. Observer (Charlotte, N.C.) 226,849
45. Tribune (Tampa, Fla.) 224,220
46. Express-News S Antonio Tx 222,536
47. Investor's Business Daily LA 215,788
48. Star-Telegram Ft Worth, TX) 215,452
49. Courier-Journal L'ville Ky 213,176
50. News (Buffalo, N.Y.) 207,989
51. Daily Oklahoman Okla City 207,538
52. Virginian-Pilot (Norfolk, Va.) 201,141
53. World-Herald Omaha Neb. 192,075
54. Pioneer Press(St Pau, Minn 190,392
55. Times-Dispatch Richmond 188,540
56. Courant (Hartford, Conn.) 185,570
57. Press-Enterprise R'side CA 183,974
58. Democrat-Gazette (L'l Rock 183,343
59. American-Statesman Austin 183,312
60. Contra Costa Times (Calif.) 182,541
61. Enquirer (Cincinnati) 182,176
62. Record (Bergen County, N.J.) 179,270
63. Daily News (Los Angeles) 178,360
64. Democrat (Rochester, N.Y.) 173,900
65. Tennessean (Nashville) 172,149
66. Post (W. Palm Beach, Fla.) 168,147
67. Times-Union(Jacksonville Fla 167,851
68. Journal (Providence, R.I.) 167,609
69. Asbury Park Press (N.J.) 167,284
70. News & Observer Raleigh NC 163,769
71. Review-Journal (Las Vegas) 160,391
72. Bee (Fresno, Calif.) 158,651
73. Commercial Appeal Memphis 157,820
74. Register (Des Moines, Iowa) 150,851
75. Post-Intelligencer (Seattle) 150,851
76. Daily Herald (Chicago) 150,364
77. News (Birmingham, Ala.) 148,938
78. Daily News (Philadelphia) 143,631
79. Journal News Westchester NY) 142,873
80. Advertiser (Honolulu) 142,025
81. Blade (Toledo, Ohio) 139,520
82. World (Tulsa, Okla.) 139,383
83. Press (Grand Rapids, Mich.) 138,620
84. Tribune (Salt Lake City) 134,985
85. Beacon Journal (Akron, Ohio 128,511
86. News Tribune Tacoma Wash .128,511
87. Daily News (Dayton, Ohio) 126,642
88. La Opinion Los Angeles Calif 124,692
89. Post-Standard Syracuse, N.Y. 120,701
90. Tribune-Review (Greensburg Pa) 119,646
91. News Journal (Wilmington, Del. ) 116,398
92. News-Sentinel (Knoxville, Tenn.) 114,593
93. State (Columbia, S.C.) 114,442
94. Morning Call (Allentown, Pa.) 111,594
95. Journal (Albuquerque) 109,693
96. Herald-Leader (Lexington, Ky.) 106,941
97. Herald-Tribune (Sarasota, Fla.) 105,636
98. News-Journal (Daytona Fla.) 104,654
99. Telegram (Worcester MA) 102,592
100. Times (Washington, DC) 102,255
<
(cc) David Iain Greig moderator talk.origins sci.bio
AP Associated Press UPI United Press International
ABC CBS NBC MSNBC Fox News CNN Larry King
Live Newsweek Time U.S. News and World Report
National Enquirer Stock Market Baghdad Iran Osama
bin Laden President Bush Saddam Hussein Rush
Limbaugh al qaeda Dick Cheney terrorists BBC Karl
Rove alt.war.iraq Donald Rumsfeld Iran Afghanistan
Disgraced Republican Rep. Mark Foley 911 Conspiracy
Velikovsky Cindy Sheehan White House Press Corps
